1887

Microbiology Society logo

Volume 168, Issue 7

Bioprotective potential of lactic acid bacteria and their metabolites against enterotoxigenic Free

Abstract

is one of the main pathogens that impacts swine production. Given the need for methods for its control, the effect of lactic acid bacteria (LAB) and their metabolites against F4 was evaluated through cell culture and microbiological analysis. The strains 5.2, 6.2, and 7.1 were selected. To evaluate the action of their metabolites, lyophilized cell-free supernatants (CFS) were used. The effect of CFS was evaluated in HT-29 intestinal lineage cells; in inhibiting the growth of the pathogen in agar; and in inhibiting the formation of biofilms. The bioprotective activity of LAB was evaluated via their potential for autoaggregation and coaggregation with . The CFS did not show cytotoxicity at lower concentrations, except for 5.2 CFS, which is responsible for cell proliferation at doses lower than 10 mg ml. The CFS were also not able to inhibit the growth of F4 in agar; however, the CFS of 7.1 resulted in a significant decrease in biofilm formation at a dose of 40 mg ml. Regarding LAB, their direct use showed great potential for autoaggregation and coaggregation , thus suggesting possible effectiveness in animal organisms, preventing fixation and proliferation. New tests are needed to evaluate lower doses of CFS to control biofilms and confirm the bioprotective potential of LAB, and tests to assess the effect of LAB and their metabolites interacting with animal physiology.

  • Received:
  • Accepted:
  • Published Online:
Keyword(s): animal production , bioprotective microorganisms , E. coli F4 , Lactiplantibacillus (Lactobacillus) plantarum and Limosilactobacillus (Lactobacillus) fermentum
© 2022 The Authors
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001216
2022-07-18
2024-05-10
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/micro/168/7/mic001216.html?itemId=/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001216&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Beutin L. Emerging enterohaemorrhagic Escherichia coli, causes and effects of the rise of a human pathogen. J Vet Med B Infect Dis Vet Public Health 2006; 53:299–305 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Robins-Browne RM, Holt KE, Ingle DJ, Hocking DM, Yang J et al. Are Escherichia coli pathotypes still relevant in the era of whole-genome sequencing?. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2016; 6:141 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Dubreuil JD. Escherichia coli | enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC). In Batt CA. eds Encyclopedia of Food Microbiology London: Elsevier; 2014 pp 728–734 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Madhavan TPV, Sakellaris H. Colonization factors of enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli. Adv Appl Microbiol 2015; 90:155–197 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Melkebeek V, Goddeeris BM, Cox E. ETEC vaccination in pigs. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 2013; 152:37–42 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Fairbrother JM, Nadeau É, Bélanger L, Tremblay C-L, Tremblay D et al. Immunogenicity and protective efficacy of a single-dose live non-pathogenic Escherichia coli oral vaccine against F4-positive enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli challenge in pigs. Vaccine 2017; 35:353–360 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Evangelista AG, Corrêa JAF, Pinto A, Luciano FB. The impact of essential oils on antibiotic use in animal production regarding antimicrobial resistance - a review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 20211–17 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Evangelista AG, Corrêa JAF, dos Santos JVG, Matté EHC, Milek MM et al. Cell-free supernatants produced by lactic acid bacteria reduce Salmonella population in vitro. Microbiology 2021; 167:11 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Yang F, Hou C, Zeng X, Qiao S. The use of lactic acid bacteria as a probiotic in Swine diets. Pathogens 2015; 4:34–45 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Quilodrán-Vega SR, Villena J, Valdebenito J, Salas MJ, Parra C et al. Isolation of lactic acid bacteria from swine milk and characterization of potential probiotic strains with antagonistic effects against swine-associated gastrointestinal pathogens. Can J Microbiol 2016; 62:514–524 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Corrêa JAF, Evangelista AG, Nazareth T de M, Luciano FB. Fundamentals on the molecular mechanism of action of antimicrobial peptides. Materialia (Oxf) 2019; 8:100494 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Danielski GM, Evangelista AG, Luciano FB, de Macedo REF. Non-conventional cultures and metabolism-derived compounds for bioprotection of meat and meat products: a review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2022; 62:1105–1118 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Evangelista AG, Luciano FB. Presença de Salmonella spp. na produção animal e o uso de fermentados bacterianos na mitigação de riscos - revisão de literatura. Arq Ciências Veterinárias e Zool da UNIPAR 2021; 24:1–7 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Oliveira JS, Costa K, Acurcio LB, Sandes SHC, Cassali GD et al. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of two potential probiotic lactobacilli isolated from cocoa fermentation (Theobroma cacao L.). J Funct Foods 2018; 47:184–191 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Santos TF, Santana LKA, Santos ACF, Silva GS, Romano CC et al. Lactic acid bacteria dynamics during spontaneous fermentation of cocoa beans verified by culture-independent denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis. Genet Mol Res 2011; 10:2702–2709 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Zheng J, Wittouck S, Salvetti E, Franz C, Harris HMB et al. A taxonomic note on the genus Lactobacillus: description of 23 novel genera, emended description of the genus Lactobacillus Beijerinck 1901, and union of Lactobacillaceae and Leuconostocaceae. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:2782–2858 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Scillato M, Spitale A, Mongelli G, Privitera GF, Mangano K et al. Antimicrobial properties of Lactobacillus cell‐free supernatants against multidrug‐resistant urogenital pathogens. MicrobiologyOpen 2021; 10:e1173 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Hamad GM, Abdelmotilib NM, Darwish AMG, Zeitoun AM. Commercial probiotic cell-free supernatants for inhibition of Clostridium perfringens poultry meat infection in Egypt. Anaerobe 2020; 62:e102181 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Jacobsen CN, Rosenfeldt Nielsen V, Hayford AE, Møller PL, Michaelsen KF et al. Screening of probiotic activities of forty-seven strains of Lactobacillus spp. by in vitro techniques and evaluation of the colonization ability of five selected strains in humans. Appl Environ Microbiol 1999; 65:4949–4956 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Bordin K, Saladino F, Fernández-Blanco C, Ruiz MJ, Mañes J et al. Reaction of zearalenone and α-zearalenol with allyl isothiocyanate, characterization of reaction products, their bioaccessibility and bioavailability in vitro. Food Chem 2017; 217:648–654 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Browne N, Traynor A, Horgan KA. Mannan rich fraction from yeast modulates inflammatory responses in intestinal cells (HT-29) exposed to Escherichia coli. JAAN 2019; 7: [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Trunk T, Khalil SH, Jack CL. Bacterial autoaggregation. AIMS Microbiol 2018; 4:140–164 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Malik A, Sakamoto M, Hanazaki S, Osawa M, Suzuki T et al. Coaggregation among nonflocculating bacteria isolated from activated sludge. Appl Environ Microbiol 2003; 69:6056–6063 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Oliveira PS, Souza SG, Campos GB, da Silva DCC, Sousa DS et al. Isolation, pathogenicity and disinfection of Staphylococcus aureus carried by insects in two public hospitals of Vitória da Conquista, Bahia, Brazil. Brazilian J Infect Dis 2014; 18:129–136 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Lin T-H, Pan T-M. Characterization of an antimicrobial substance produced by Lactobacillus plantarum NTU 102. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 2019; 52:409–417 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Poornachandra Rao K, Deepthi BV, Rakesh S, Ganesh T, Achar P et al. Antiaflatoxigenic potential of cell-free supernatant from Lactobacillus plantarum MYS44 against Aspergillus parasiticus. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins 2019; 11:55–64 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Yolmeh M, Khomeiri M, Ahmadi Z. Application of mixture design to introduce an optimum cell-free supernatant of multiple-strain mixture (MSM) for Lactobacillus against food-borne pathogens. LWT - Food Science and Technology 2017; 83:298–304 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Kumar R, Sharma A, Gupta M, Padwad Y, Sharma R. Cell-free culture supernatant of probiotic lactobacillus fermentum pprotects against H2O2-induced premature senescence by suppressing ROS-Akt-mTOR axis in murine preadipocytes. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins 2020; 12:563–576 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  29. De Vuyst L, Leroy F. Bacteriocins from lactic acid bacteria: production, purification, and food applications. J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol 2007; 13:194–199 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Pridmore RD, Pittet AC, Praplan F, Cavadini C. Hydrogen peroxide production by Lactobacillus johnsonii NCC 533 and its role in anti-Salmonella activity. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2008; 283:210–215 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Urban MV, Rath T, Radtke C. Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2): a review of its use in surgery. Wien Med Wochenschr 2017; 169:222–225 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Chen Z-Y, Hsieh Y-M, Huang C-C, Tsai C-C. Inhibitory effects of probiotic Lactobacillus on the growth of human colonic carcinoma cell line HT-29. Molecules 2017; 22:107 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Sirichokchatchawan W, Temeeyasen G, Nilubol D, Prapasarakul N. Protective effects of cell-free supernatant and live lactic acid bacteria isolated from Thai pigs against a pandemic strain of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins 2018; 10:383–390 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Blottière HM, Buecher B, Galmiche J-P, Cherbut C. Molecular analysis of the effect of short-chain fatty acids on intestinal cell proliferation. Proc Nutr Soc 2003; 62:101–106 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Balaban S, Shearer RF, Lee LS, van Geldermalsen M, Schreuder M et al. Adipocyte lipolysis links obesity to breast cancer growth: adipocyte-derived fatty acids drive breast cancer cell proliferation and migration. Cancer Metab 2017; 5: [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Wang JX, Choi SYC, Niu X, Kang N, Xue H et al. Lactic acid and an acidic tumor microenvironment suppress anticancer immunity. Int J Mol Sci 2020; 21:21 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Lampe KJ, Namba RM, Silverman T, Bjugstad KB, Mahoney MJ. Impact of lactic acid on cell proliferation and free radical-induced cell death in monolayer cultures of neural precursor cells. Biotechnol Bioeng 2009; 103:1214–1223 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Abushelaibi A, Al-Mahadin S, El-Tarabily K, Shah NP, Ayyash M. Characterization of potential probiotic lactic acid bacteria isolated from camel milk. LWT - Food Science and Technology 2017; 79:316–325 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Arellano‐Ayala K, Ascencio‐Valle FJ, Gutiérrez‐González P, Estrada‐Girón Y, Torres‐Vitela MR et al. Hydrophobic and adhesive patterns of lactic acid bacteria and their antagonism against foodborne pathogens on tomato surface (Solanum lycopersicum L.). J Appl Microbiol 2020; 129:876–891 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Krausova G, Hyrslova I, Hynstova I. In vitro evaluation of adhesion capacity, hydrophobicity, and auto-aggregation of newly isolated potential probiotic strains. Fermentation 2019; 5:100 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Collado MC, Surono I, Meriluoto J, Salminen S. Indigenous dadih lactic acid bacteria: cell-surface properties and interactions with pathogens. J Food Sci 2007; 72:M89–93 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Singh N, Kaur R, Singh BP, Rokana N, Goel G et al. Impairment of Cronobacter sakazakii and Listeria monocytogenes biofilms by cell-free preparations of lactobacilli of goat milk origin. Folia Microbiol (Praha) 2020; 65:185–196 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Rana S, Bhawal S, Kumari A, Kapila S, Kapila R. PH-dependent inhibition of AHL-mediated quorum sensing by cell-free supernatant of lactic acid bacteria in Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1. Microb Pathog 2020; 142:104–105 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Zamani H, Rahbar S, Garakoui SR, Afsah Sahebi A, Jafari H. Antibiofilm potential of Lactobacillus plantarum spp. cell free supernatant (CFS) against multidrug resistant bacterial pathogens. Pharm Biomed Res 2017; 3:39–44 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Melo TA, dos Santos TF, de Almeida ME, Junior L, Andrade EF et al. Inhibition of Staphylococcus aureus biofilm by Lactobacillus isolated from fine cocoa. BMC Microbiol 2016; 16:250 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Gómez NC, Ramiro JMP, de Quecan BXV, Melo Franco BDG. Use of potential probiotic lactic acid bacteria (LAB) biofilms for the control of Listeria monocytogenes, Salmonella typhimurium, and Escherichia coli O157:H7 biofilms formation. Front Microbiol 2016; 7:e863 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Tatsaporn T, Kornkanok K. Using potential lactic acid bacteria biofilms and their compounds to control biofilms of foodborne pathogens. Biotechnol Reports 2020; 26:e00477 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001216
Loading
Bioprotective potential of lactic acid bacteria and their metabolites against enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli
Microbiology 168, 001216 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1099/mic.0.001216
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001216
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001216
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error